Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dipak Misra, C.J.I. and Sanjay Kishan Kaul

ORDER

Civil Appeal No. 7546 of 2013

1. In this appeal, by special leave, the Appellant calls in question the legal propriety of the order dated 18th August, 2010, passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in F.A.O. No. 1648 of 2008, whereunder the High Court has dislodged the finding of the tribunal and made the owner liable after enhancing the amount of compensation. The insurer has been absolved on the ground that the Appellant was a gratuitous passenger in the car.

2. It is submitted by Mr. Yadunandan Bansal, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant that the controversy is covered by the two-Judge Bench decision in National Insurance Co. Limited v. Balakrishnan and Anr. MANU/SC/0987/2012 : (2013) 1 SCC 731, wherein the Court has held thus:

It is extremely important to note here that till 31st December, 2006 the Tariff Advisory Committee and, thereafter, from 1st January, 2007, IRDA functioned as the statutory regulatory authorities and they are entitled to fix the tariff as well as the terms and conditions of the policies by all insurance companies. The High Court had issued notice to the Tariff Advisory Committee and the IRDA to explain the factual position as regards the liability of the insurance companies in respect of an occupant in a private car under the "comprehensive/package policy". Before the High Court, the Competent Authority of IRDA had stated that on 2nd June, 1986, the Tariff Advisory Committee had issued instructions to all the insurance companies to cover the pillion rider of a scooter/motorcycle under the "comprehensive policy" and the said position continues to be in vogue till date. It had also admitted that the "comprehensive policy" is presently called a "package policy". It is the admitted position, as the decision would show, the earlier circulars dated 18th March, 1978 and 2nd June, 1986 continue to be valid and effective and all insurance companies are bound to pay the compensation in respect of the liability towards an occupant in a car under the "comprehensive/package policy" irrespective of the terms and conditions contained in the policy. The competent authority of the IRDA was also examined before the High Court who stated that the circulars dated 18th March, 1978 and 2nd June, 1986 of the Tariff Advisory Committee were incorporated in the Indian Motor Tariff effective from 1st July, 2002 and they continue to be operative and binding on the insurance companies. Because of the aforesaid factual position, the circulars dated 16th November 2009 and 3rd December, 2009, that have been reproduced hereinabove, were issued.

It is also worthy to note that the High Court, after referring to individual circulars issued by various insurance companies, eventually stated thus:

In view of the aforesaid, it is clear that the comprehensive/package policy of a two wheeler covers a pillion rider and comprehensive/package policy of a private car covers the occupants and where the vehicle is covered under a comprehensive/package policy, there is no need for Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to go into the question whether the Insurance Company is liable to compensate for the death or injury of a pillion rider on a two-wheeler or the occupants in a private car. In fact, in view of the TAC's directives ........